I'm genuinely surprised that somebody hasn't just fucked him up in a parking lot. There's only so many people you can piss off so personally, so deeply, before you run across somebody's angry brother.

Try doing just a little research before you say something stupid. 

http://birth-control-pills.findthebest.com/

http://birth-control-pills.findthebest. … -pill-cost

Radio Fatboy deserves radio death but probably will survive.

Fled wrote:

Try doing just a little research before you say something stupid.

You are asking a lot from that half wit.

Fled wrote:

Radio Fatboy deserves radio death but probably will survive.

Maybe not:  http://news.yahoo.com/ads-pulled-rush-l … 51467.html

I think he will share Howard Stern's and Glenn Beck's destiny, second rate idiot eventually banished to internet radio.

sigmoid freud wrote:

Cut Rush some slack. As we all know, he's a recovering drug addict.

Who smuggles Viagra into the Dominican Republic for a vacation.

fnord wrote:

The image of that gross pig taking a Viagra, climbing on top of a turd world octoroon prostitute, and pushing on his enormous gut to make his tiny fat enveloped penis pop out so that he can stick it into her well worn and disease ridden poontang, is the stuff of nausea and nightmares!

Actually he was buying American, he was taking his slut with him.

However he downfall appears to be less impressive than I had imagined it would be, it appears that America won't stand for it's young lady's being disparaged in such a manner.  Gives me a bit of hope.

…or maybe we were all just waiting for this, that final straw...

Tall Paul wrote:

Brought to you by the fine folks at Clear Channel! It's only a matter of time before the dump his fat ass back on the street. For real insight into Rush's career, you can't do better than to watch his first appearance on TV. The audience was so disgusted by his reprehensible spewingsforth that the studio had to be cleared in order to finish the final segment. Too bad no one took that hint back then.

I hate to say this but that was just playing to his hand; it was manipulated and planned.  He just didn't realize that America wasn't ready for it back then.

You have to hand it to fat boy, he's played the Wal-Mart crowd like a fiddle and made an enormous ton of money doing so.  Who knows what he really thinks or believes, he's just like the NFL, simply selling a product.

XregnaR wrote:

Birth control is a hell of a lot cheaper than paying for the results of not using it.

I personally think that vasectomies should be free to any male between 15 - 30.  Spend the money saved on excess crotchfruit and other birth control on making it the process easily reversible.

I'm not disagreeing that birth control is cheaper than not having it. Of course it is. I'm just saying that it's not what I call "insurance". Using toilet paper keeps me from getting anal infections too, why can't I get my "insurance" to pay for that too?

And giving free vasectomies would only change the behavior of people that could afford it themselves. As long as the government pays you real cash money for every kid you generate, everything else is just pissing in the wind.

I'm still trying to understand why anyone believes contraception and pregnancy are health issues.  Health insurance is supposed to cover infirmities, not lifestyle choices.  If you want to fuck without getting pregnant, or if you want to bring another mouth into the world, have at it, but not on my dime.

Edit:  I predict Rush will come out of this far better than those advertisers who bail on him.

Last edited by phreddy (2012-03-07 14:42:02)

GooberMcNutly wrote:

I'm not disagreeing that birth control is cheaper than not having it. Of course it is. I'm just saying that it's not what I call "insurance". Using toilet paper keeps me from getting anal infections too, why can't I get my "insurance" to pay for that too?

You do. Your "insurance" pays for things like prostate exams and pills to lower cholesterol BEFORE you get cancer or a heart attack. Under your version of insurance, things only get paid for after the catastrophe, which is the worst possible way to run a health system in terms of health, cost, efficiency and human lives.

ah297900 wrote:

phreddy wrote:

I'm still trying to understand why anyone believes contraception and pregnancy are health issues.  Health insurance is supposed to cover infirmities, not lifestyle choices.  If you want to fuck without getting pregnant, or if you want to bring another mouth into the world, have at it, but not on my dime.

As to the first sentence, that's just a staggering statement for anybody to make.

As to the last sentence, you're saying "Birth control on my dime: NO. Lots of expensive, unwanted pregnancies on my $1000 bill: YES."

Are you also willing to pay a lot more through insurance for long-term diabetes care than a few hour-long meetings with a dietician? Quadruple-bypass surgery instead of generic cholesterol medicine?

What Phreddy (or at least his crowd) used to want is an America where millions of unwanted children grow up in humiliation, despair and poverty so that the boys would become cannon fodder and the girls could be whores for them to punishment-fuck. He still wants that, but now he also wants both sexes to become criminals so that his for-profit prison stock can pay bigger dividends. How he still finds the gall to rant about The Land Of The Free is something I can't fathom. Try putting down the allegorical deviant sexual fantasies of that illegal immigrant Ayn Rand and pick up some Charles Dickens, Phred.

Be that as it may, Phreddy and Rush are both smart to know that oral contraceptive pills aren't slut enablers, and that they are used to treat a wide variety of other medical conditions. To say otherwise would be like denying insurance coverage of morphine after surgery because you hate and fear junkies.

phreddy wrote:

It amazes me how thick you and Ah can be.  First, I am sure the Catholic Church does not object to use of oral contraceptive pills for non contraceptive purposes.

Really? That's the best you can do? Denial? I can feel your anger, my friend, but you NEED to move through bargaining and depression to acceptance if only for your own good. I never thought I would have had to point this out to anyone, but if the Catholic Church hadn't objected to oral contraceptives for any use we wouldn't be having this calm and well-reasoned argument. The only point you might possibly stand on is that the objection has come from the American bishops, not the church per se, but that's the kind of weaseling that gives blinkered zealots a bad name.

Maybe Blind Lemon Phred might be a better screen name for you.


Edit: Want to debate why fucking should induce guilt? I didn't think so.

Last edited by Tall Paul (2012-03-07 19:48:53)

phreddy wrote:

I predict Rush will come out of this far better than those advertisers who bail on him.

Of course he will be better off than ever. The advertisers are already beating down the door to return.

Yesterday, the dating site offered to start buying 30- and 60-second spots on Rush’s show. If approved, the ads will run next month...

“Rush Limbaugh, who married a blonde bombshell half his age, is a model Sugar Daddy,” the company announced. “The moniker of a Sugar Daddy is that of an older, successful, wealthy man romantically involved with a younger, beautiful woman, much like the relationship Rush shares with his much younger wife, Lauryn Rogers.”

“Rush Limbaugh is one of the greatest examples of the modern day Sugar Daddy,” Wade said in a press release. “We wouldn’t feel right if we didn’t come forward and support him in his time of need.”

Wade, who has degrees from MIT, said financially based relationships are actually better than the other sort. “The fact that people are brutally honest up front makes these relationships healthier than others where people beat around the bush. If you know going into a relationship that a person is going to use you and you are going to use them, then it’s healthier because there is a mutually agreed exchange of expectations.”

And as if no one could see it coming: It's all Obama's fault!

Of course there's deafening silence on the question "If that's true, how does it come about that you were all so fucking stupid as to fall for it? Of course, fucking stupidly is all you can expect when there's no sex education in schools.

XregnaR wrote:

If you want your toilet paper covered by insurance, you should be willing and able to pay for that premium yourself.  the government shouldn't force you to buy the toilet paper premium, and they shouldn't force the insurance company to offer it.

Sure they should. Only need to see one budget toilet paper shitstain to conclude it's a crime.

XregnaR wrote:

While I don't particularly love the idea of "socialized" medicine

Socialized medicine has been a reality since the enactment of EMTALA and other predated laws.  It's a Right to Life issue, trying to abort that Right is silly and wasteful.

Conservatives need to look at the facts of the situation and consider the core tenants of our Constitution, oddly enough the "right to life" is the first tenant of our society.

A lot of people object to health care reform because it can be described as "socialized," which is a word that is apparently inherently scary for many people. Oddly enough, if you have a "No Fear" shirt or bumper sticker, it's very likely that you're afraid of anything "socialized."

To help you all feel better, here is a partial list of American institutions that are "socialized"--something owned by a large group of people, or the whole citizenry through government--and that nobody seems to have a problem with:

Fire departments
Police departments
the legal system
the Green Bay Packers
the national highway system
The United States Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard (their medicine is socialized too)
the national air traffic control system
FDIC
the FBI


All of the above are owned by the community--whether local or national--and operated by the government. Everybody in the community pays into the above, although not everybody gets the same benefits out of it. Running any of the above as a private, for-profit enterprise would be monumentally stupid.

Feel better, kids.

Emmeran wrote:

My personal favorite line is "the private sector can do it cheaper and better", of course this is patently untrue as all the private sector can really do is add a 17% markup to the current cost.

What you don't understand Em is that without private sector competition the "current cost" is going to be outrageous.  If you gave the federal government the exclusive right to manufacture and distribute digital TVs, two things would happen.   1.  There would be no digital TVs because there would have been no incentive to grow past analog.  2.  The price would be a year's wages.  You may not be remember what it was like in the old Soviet Union, but their merchandise was scarce and expensive.  Farm workers worked on huge collective farms, but almost all the country's the food was produced from the small plots the workers were allowed to farm for themselves.  Anyone who believes socialism is more efficient is either too young to remember history, or too idealistic to listen to the truth.

phreddy wrote:

Emmeran wrote:

My personal favorite line is "the private sector can do it cheaper and better", of course this is patently untrue as all the private sector can really do is add a 17% markup to the current cost.

What you don't understand Em is that without private sector competition the "current cost" is going to be outrageous.  If you gave the federal government the exclusive right to manufacture and distribute digital TVs, two things would happen.   1.  There would be no digital TVs because there would have been no incentive to grow past analog.  2.  The price would be a year's wages.  You may not be remember what it was like in the old Soviet Union, but their merchandise was scarce and expensive.  Farm workers worked on huge collective farms, but almost all the country's the food was produced from the small plots the workers were allowed to farm for themselves.  Anyone who believes socialism is more efficient is either too young to remember history, or too idealistic to listen to the truth.

Communism with elites is not Socialism.  Look at Norway, Sweden, Switzerland.  You know, successful economies that work.

phreddy wrote:

What you don't understand Em is that without private sector competition the "current cost" is going to be outrageous.

Utter bullshit.

Let's choose, oh say health insurance as a handy example. How much cheaper is Medicare Advantage than plain old government controlled socialist Medicare?

ah297900 wrote:

How about the idea that some things, by their very nature, should NEVER be run by private companies who aren't even theoretically accountable to the citizens. The army is one of these things. Digital TVs are not.

You'd think that the recent spectacular failures in the efficient and vastly superior private sector (a mess cleaned up very well by the public sector) would make people like Phred rethink the idea that private industry is better at all things at all times. Buuuuuuuut no. It's time to double down on that one.

OK, so let's keep the government out of the digital TV market and while we're at it the auto market, and banking, and insurance, and oil production, and train travel, and .............

phreddy wrote:

ah297900 wrote:

How about the idea that some things, by their very nature, should NEVER be run by private companies who aren't even theoretically accountable to the citizens. The army is one of these things. Digital TVs are not.

You'd think that the recent spectacular failures in the efficient and vastly superior private sector (a mess cleaned up very well by the public sector) would make people like Phred rethink the idea that private industry is better at all things at all times. Buuuuuuuut no. It's time to double down on that one.

OK, so let's keep the government out of the digital TV market and while we're at it the auto market, and banking, and insurance, and oil production, and train travel, and .............

Look Phreddy, I'm a Capitalist, a devout Capitalist.  Competition is good in my book.  But I also strongly believe in Sovereign Wealth, as in:  "We the people in order to create a more perfect union".  What we have here belongs to all of us, you know, like the revolutionary war and all that were fought for.  The fact that we are a sovereign debt nation is embarrassing and perfect proof that the privatization system is fucked, we have now privatized shit that the very idea of privatizing would have given Reagan a stroke. 

Government's job in a Capitalist society is to regulate and provide over-sight, strict and keen oversight;  basically to prevent the fraud and collusion that is inherent in the capitalist system.  The conservatives didn't want to do that and eventually they themselves were forced to take over the auto industry.  Yep, Bush's final accomplishment was to nationalize GM and Chrysler, stings don't it?

As a career Marine I call bullshit on any claim that the private sector is cheaper and better, its all about motivation and management; so please explain exactly how the Private sector is better and please don't point to piss poor management structure - that exists on both sides and is intentionally created in the public sector by the privateers as a method to add new revenue streams. 

Also, while your at it, please explain how the addition of a 17% margin does anything but repress our economy and restrict our inherent growth...

Heh.  I thought is was going to be a petition to stop playing Rush during Rush's show.

phreddy wrote:

I could launch into a dissertation on Lean or Just in Time manufacturing and distributed resource allocation, but your eyes would probably glaze over.

Don't flatter yourself, those who loudly over-estimate themselves and under-estimate others are literally always the under-informed nimrod.

phreddy wrote:

However, these are the tools of modern manufacturing and distribution and this is why products cost so much less today (based on comparative dollars).  There is no way the government would have developed or used them without the whip provided by competition.

The government is simply a collection of people and this specific government has a long and storied history of great accomplishments and inventions - things private companies could never and would never pull off.

Lessee...Moon Landing, Internet, Nuclear Power (and weapons), public schools, Hoover Dam...  ...the list goes on and on and on.  What you conveniently forget is that private industry, particularly post-Reagen modern industry, is only worried about short term profits.  They lack the vision and motivation to accomplish truly grand achievements.

Em wrote:

GODDAMNIT NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT GOVERNMENT MAKING CONSUMER GOODS

Well then I guess we don't have any argument.  However, your claim that "Moon Landing, Internet, Nuclear Power (and weapons), public schools, Hoover Dam...  ...the list goes on and on and on. " neglects the fact that all of these were built by private contractors through a competitive bidding process.

Last edited by phreddy (2012-03-09 15:05:47)